Re: Why does r-cran-rcppgsl not migrate to testing?
Hi Dirk,
On Thu, Sep 07, 2017 at 02:46:04PM -0500, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
>
> On 7 September 2017 at 21:20, Andreas Tille wrote:
> | Hi Dirk,
> |
> | On Wed, Sep 06, 2017 at 04:22:33PM -0500, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
> | > On 6 September 2017 at 22:48, Andreas Tille wrote:
> | > | On Wed, Sep 06, 2017 at 10:17:04AM -0500, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
> | > | >
> | > | > | Is there any list of affected packages?
> | > | >
> | > | > I gave this URL about half a dozen times:
> | > | >
> | > | > http://eddelbuettel.github.io/rcppapt/binnmuAfterR340.html
> | > |
> | > | Well, you know from own experience that not all information is reaching
> | > | the target audience. It might have helped to address Debian Science and
> | > | Debian Med team to make some more noise.
> | > |
> | > | > It contains the list, as well as a way to compute it.
> |
> | Any chance to recompute the list just in case somebody else has also
> | upgraded a package? It would be nice if the list would have a timestamp
> | of creation.
>
> It should just work -- the write up is after all hanging off the RcppAPT
> repo, so just install RcppAPT and then you can query R _and Debian_ from R.
> The one step Prof Hornik suggested required CRAN sources to grep, but I think
> I in the last iteration I proxied that by just fetching the .tar.gz from
> CRAN. Or at least it could be done.
>
> If you have a question about RcppAPT maybe just open an issue at GitHub.
Dirk, you misunderstood my query: I was asking you for upgrading your
list which is now heavily outdated not how I can learn a tool. You
explained how often you linked to your page - a that frequently linked
page should be up to date to avoid others from trying to pick up work
that is now done.
Please try to understand that if you want to attract people to work on a
common goal with you you should try to make their work as easy as
possible.
> I'll be traveling this weekend so not sure I'll get to that before next week.
>
> | > | The list is not fully up to date. I recently uploaded a new version of
> | > | r-cran-randomfields which remains inside the list. I need to admit a
> | > | shorter page which points directly to tasks to do which is up to date
> | > | would be more motivating to lend a helping hand.
> | > |
> | > | I just uploaded
> | > |
> | > | r-cran-spdep
> | > | r-cran-gam
> | > | r-cran-mcmc
> |
> | I uploaded as well:
> |
> | r-cran-data.table
> | r-cran-vegan
> | r-cran-bayesm
> | r-cran-expm
> | r-cran-phangorn
> | r-cran-maptools
> | r-cran-caret
> | r-cran-goftest
> | r-cran-igraph
> | r-cran-maps
> | r-cran-eco
> | r-cran-randomfields
> | r-bioc-genefilter
I worked down the whole list with exception of your own package
r-cran-hdf5 and for two remaining packages I needed to package new
dependencies. I've pinged #debian-ftp on IRC asking for fast
processing.
> That helps with the open bug report, thank you! As you know I'd also love to
> see them be current. I find with my r-cran-* packages (of which I have
> several dozen) that it only takes a couple of minutes each time so I
> generally do.
I admit that some packages took a bit longer in case of the team hijacks
I did (Chris I keep on assuming that this is OK for you). I also had to
deal with binary files that should be documented in README.source (I
wished we had a Debian R team clarifying things with ftpmaster in a more
packagers friendly way).
Regarding your response below: Dirk, I consider my own time to valuable
to correct your offending accusations. I felt it way better spent by
just fixing the packages. I have some ideas how we could enhance the
situation but I'm not willing to discuss with you if you always turn to
pointless insulting accusations.
Kind regards
Andreas.
> | For those who want to help but have no idea how to do a team upload:
> |
> | debcheckout --user <user_name_on_alioth> --git-track '*' <package>
> | cd <package>
> | dch --team
> | # do at least a Standards-Version: 4.1.0
> | # even better
> | uscan --verbose
> | # upgrade to new version
> | # commit + push your changes
> |
> | Any Debian developer has commit permissions to Debian Med / Debian
> | Science repositories. Other users need to ask for team membership.
> | It would be fine if you submit for instance
> |
> | git format-patch <your_first_commit>
> |
> | and attach these patches to a sponsoring request bug.
> |
> | In case a package is not yet in VCS you can do the following:
> |
> | gbp import-dscs --debsnap --pristine-tar <package>
> | cd <package>
> | # ask maintainer whether it is OK to move the package
> | # into Debian Science team maintenance. If yes,
> | # add Vcs Fields and the Debian Science maintainer list
> | # as Maintainer, keeping the former Maintainer as Uploader
> | # do changes as above
> | # to inject your freshly created repository you can use
> | svn checkout svn://anonscm.debian.org/debian-med/trunk/helper-scripts /tmp/helper-scripts
> | /tmp/helper-scripts/inject-into-alioth-git
> |
> | This is basically what I did with the packages above and I'll try
> | to keep on working on this.
> |
> | > | > | I intend to refresh with new upstream sources anyway in the next couple of days. May be we can do
> | > | > | real uploads of most of the packages ourselves?
> | > | >
> | > | > Please do. Being behind upstream is essentially never a good idea.
> | > |
> | > | I'd prefer if you would leave out at least every second chance to repeat
> | > | this. We could talk about this once somebody might pay somebody to
> | > | follow each and every update of any random R package.
> | >
> | > I may once you start to maintain them -- instead of just hoarding them Take
> | > but one example: https://packages.debian.org/sid/r-cran-data.table
> | >
> | > Exactly who is served by not updating one of the more widely used to package
> | > to one of the two releases that happened _this calendar year_ ?
> |
> | If you would ask a non-polemic question I would consider answering
> | instead of working on the packages even if you are stealing the topic of
> | the thread.
>
> Sorry, but you started this. After you had the temerity to ask about this
> list when I had posted the same URL probably four or five times already.
>
> And I just don't understand why you get so irritated about it. This is a
> simple observable reality visible to everybody who cares to look a the QA
> pages for debian-med and debian-science. Hundreds of packages, generally
> well maintained with few critical bugs --- but for several years now also
> generally outdated. You can jump up and down and scream at me as much as you
> want, but the fix is not in yelling at me for pointing this out. The fix is
> in keeping the packages current. As we do with most other Debian packages.
>
> Dirk
>
> --
> http://dirk.eddelbuettel.com | @eddelbuettel | edd@debian.org
>
>
--
http://fam-tille.de
Reply to: